Kadavallur Grama Panchayath,Karikkad P.O v. the Joint Regional Transport Officer

Kerala HC3 Jul 2012WP(C)/23867/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismisses a writ petition challenging an order directing the shift of an unauthorized taxi stand. It also directs the respondent authorities to expeditiously implement that decision to relocate the stand, ensuring safety for school children.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners' petition dismissed. Respondents directed to implement decision to shift the unauthorized taxi stand to a suitable place within two weeks.

Kadavallur Grama Panchayath,Karikkad P.O Vs the Joint… — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JULY 2012/12TH ASHADHA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 23867 of 2011 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

KADAVALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KARIKKAD.P.O,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680519 REP.BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.DEEPU THANKAN SMT.SONIA GEORGE

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, WADAKKANCHERRY,THRISSUR DISTRICT.PIN-680582

¶11

2. MUHAMMAD RASHEED.C,PRINCIPAL, ANSAR ENGLISH SCHOOL, PERUMPILAVU,KARIKKAD.P.O THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680519.

¶12

BY ADVS. DR.PAULY MATHEW MURICKEN SRI.K.P.ABDUL RASSAK

¶13

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.ANITHA RAVINDRAN

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-07-2012, ALONG WITH WPC. 4323/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:

¶17

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE PANCHAYATH DATED 9.2.2011 EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(c) NO.7512/2011 DATED 6.7.2011 EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PANCHAYATH PRESIDENT DATED 10.8.2011 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶18

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 19.8.2011.

¶19

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:

¶20

EXHIBIT R2(a):TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 20.7.2010 OF THE CBSE, DELHI EXHIBIT R2(b):TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.11.2010 ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR MINORITY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, NEW DELHI.

¶21

EXHIBIT R2(c):TRUE COPY OF THE GOOGLE MAP.

¶22

EXHIBIT R2(d):TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE KERALA PANCHAYATH RAJ(LANDING PLACES, HALTING PLACES, CART STAND AND OTHER VEHICLE STANDS)RULES, 1995 EXHIBIT R2(e):TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE GUIDELINES ISSUED BY THE KERALA POLICE INFORMATION CENTRE, DATED 25-02-2010. EXHIBIT R2(f):TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE RULES OF THE ROAD REGULATIONS, 1989. EXHIBIT R2(g):TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NEWS REPORT PUBLISHED IN THE HINDU DAILY DATED 23-07-2005. EXHIBIT R2(h):TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. EXHIBIT R2(i):TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NEWS REPORT PUBLISHED IN THE MADHYAMAM DAILY DATED 27.2.2011. EXHIBIT R2(j):TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT PUBLISHED IN THE MALAYLALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 28-02-2011.

¶23

EXHIBIT R2(k):TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT DATED 21-07-2011 IN THE MATHRUBHUMI DAILY.

¶24

EXHIBIT R2(l): A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NEWS REPORT DATED 27-06-2011 PUBLISHED IN THE MALAYLALA MANORAMA DAILY.

¶25

EXHIBIT R2(m)SERIES:A TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT DATED 2-06-2011 PUBLISHED IN MAHDYAMAM DAILY AND NEWS PHOTOGRAPH DATED 2.6.2011 PUBLISHED IN THE MATHRUBHUMI DAILY

¶26

//TRUE COPY//

¶27

P.A.TO JUDGE

¶28

K.SURENDRA MOHAN,J.

¶29

--------------------------------------------WP(C).Nos. 23867 of 2011 & 4323 of 2012

¶30

---------------------------------------------Dated this the 3^rd day of July, 2012

¶31

J U D G M E N T

¶32

The petitioner in W.P.(C).No.4323 of 2012 is the Principal of a school at Perumpilavu in Thrissur District. The petitioner has filed this writ petition aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the authorities, in implementing a decision to shift ane unauthorised taxi stand located in front of the school to some other place. WPC No.23867 of 2011 is filed by the Kadavallur Grama Panchayat challenging Ext.P4 proceedings of the Joint Regional Transport Officer, Wadakanchery by which, the taxi stand has been directed to be shifted. Since Ext.P4 is produced as Ext.P9 in the other writ petition, the issues in both these cases are considered and disposed of together.

¶33

According to the learned counsel appearing for

¶34

the petitioner, the location of the taxi stand right in front

¶35

-:2:-

¶36

WP(C).Nos. 23867 of 2011 & 4323 of 2012

¶37

of the school, close to its main gate is a source of danger and inconvenience to the functioning of the school as well as to the children who are studying there. It is also contended that the taxi stand has been located at the place in violation of Ext.P17, Rules issued under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. Ext.P19, Rules of the Road Regulations, 1989 are also violated, it is contended.

¶38

According to the Panchayat, the taxi stand was located in front of the school only as a temporary parking area for vehicles except Auto Rickshaws. However, according to the Panchayat, the same has been objected to without any justification. A counter affidavit has been filed in W.P.(C).No.23867/2011 which has been adopted to the other cases also. The Joint Regional Transport Officer, Wadakanchery has sworn to the affidavit. According to the said authority, pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in W.P.(C).No.7152 of 2011 filed by the Principal of

¶39

-:3:-

¶40

WP(C).Nos. 23867 of 2011 & 4323 of 2012

¶41

the school, the application submitted by the said person was considered. A meeting was convened on 12.08.2011 which was attended by the President of the Kadavallur Grama Panchayat, it's Secretary, Principal of the school, Assistant Sub Inspector of Police, Kunnamkulam, Cheif Executive Engineer KSTP,Kuttipuram and the Secretary of the Taxi Drivers Union, Perumpilavu. At the meeting, it was decided to shift the taxi stand from the front of the school to some other place. Thereafter, necessary proceedings have also been issued, according to the counter affidavit.

¶42

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the

¶43

contesting parties, perused the records of the case and have considered the rival contentions anxiously.

¶44

According to the counter affidavit filed by the Joint Regional Transport Officer, a meeting of all the concerned parties had been convened and a decision was arrived at, to shift the taxi stand. The counter affidavit has further stated

¶45

-:4:-

¶46

WP(C).Nos. 23867 of 2011 & 4323 of 2012

¶47

as follows:

¶48

Accordingly, proceedings No.CA-581/2011/WKY dated 19.08.2011 was issued by this authority directing the Panchayat Authority to remove the Taxi Stand and shift the same to a suitable place for avoiding inconvenience to the school going children and as well as for safety reasons.

¶49

Since the authorities are convinced that the taxi stand is required to be shifted and located at some other place, it is absolutely necessary that the said decision is implemented in letter and spirit. After due enquiry and consideration, with the participation of all affected parties, a decision to shift the taxi stand has been taken. Though according to the Panchayat, the taxi stand was located there only as a temporary measure, the same cannot be permitted in view of the decision that has been taken by the authorities as stated above.

¶50

For the above reasons, W.P.(C).No.23867 of 2011 is dismissed. The respondent Nos. 3 to 8 in W.P(C).No.4323 of 2012 are directed to implement the decision in Ext.P9 and

¶51

-:5:-

¶52

WP(C).Nos. 23867 of 2011 & 4323 of 2012

¶53

to ensure that the taxi stand is shifted and relocated at a suitable place. Action in this regard shall be taken as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶54

K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE

¶55

kkj

Kadavallur Grama Panchayath,Karikkad P.O v. the Joint Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kadavallur Grama Panchayath,Karikkad P.O v. the Joint Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rado Tyres Employees Association Vs State of Kerala

M/S. Vaish Security Vs Union of India and Others

Rappai Vs Irinjalakuda Town Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Grama Vikasana Karma Samithy Vs State of Kerala

Joseph Jacob Vs State of Kerala

The Thiruvananthapuram District Co-Operative Marketing and Processing Society Limited Vs Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies